PAGE 1 OF 9

Unified Your State Common Law Grand Jury

Psa 89:14 Justice and judgment are the habitation of thy throne: mercy and truth shall go before thy face.
PO Box ???, Your Town, Your State, 00000 Phone (???) ???-???? Fax (???) ???-????


Date, 2014
Sheriffs Name;
Address
City, State & zip
Dear Sheriff Name;
THE PURPOSE of this letter is to clarify the authority by which we the People act upon, the action
we executed and the process we intend to proceed upon.
The United States Supreme Court case Boyd v. United States in 1922 proclaims the remedy of
todays problems, when they said; "It is the duty of the courts to be watchful for encroachments
against Constitutional rights"; in Olmstead v. United States the court stated further: "Decency,
security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules
of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the
government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrup-u-lous-ly. Our Government is the
potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example.
Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it
invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that, in the
administration of the criminal law, the end justifies the means, to declare that the Government
may commit crimes would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this Court
should resolutely set its face," and so should every court do, but they will not, so the People will.
The present jury system has been seized by our servants that created a deceptive faade used to
empower themselves and not the People. Bar schools teach judges and attorneys that statutes of
men, far removed from the People, overrule the law of the land. While both prosecutor(s) and
judge(s) impose their will upon judicially ignorant people as they require juries to interpret
statutes as law without opportunity to nullify. Whereas common law requires that the jury should
judge both law and facts. Bar attorneys are true believers that the People are incompetent in law
when in fact it is they! We the People know the law while BAR attorneys know statutes as law.
PAGE 2 OF 9

Jefferson said: "I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people
themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a
wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by
education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power." He also said: "An
enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic. Self-government
is not possible unless the citizens are educated sufficiently to enable them to exercise oversight.
It is therefore imperative that the nation see to it that a suitable education be provided for all its
citizens."
But our servants in government have deceitfully removed the education of Self-government,
whos motive can only be more power. Therefore we the People, 10s of thousands of us across
the nation are Self-educating in order to perform our duty. We reject any servant who arrogantly
claims the People incompetent and that only they know whats best for us. We need to remind
them we have government by the consent of the People and not by the consent of our servants
and/or their BAR.
The People through the US Constitution gave no legislative authority to codify the
administration of the jury. Common law requires that juries be chosen from an unfiltered pool
from among the People by the People. The people when debating the body of the constitution,
after discussions concerning the jury in the [anti]/federalist papers, deliberately left said authority
out of the body, and then by design included unfettered authority by the People in the Bill of
Rights as expressed in the 5
th
, 6
th
, and 7
th
Amendments making clear that it is the right of the
people to administer to the jury for the trying of people and not political government servants.
Bar lawyers will then say that, the bill of rights is for the federal courts only, but this is where
bar schools, for treasonous reasons I can only conclude, failed again by not teaching the law of
the land, a/k/a supremacy clause, which is as follows:
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in
pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges
in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any
State to the contrary notwithstanding. -- US Constitution Article VI
PAGE 3 OF 9

Therefore common law is expressed in the supreme law of the land, whereas statutes that control
the behavior and powers of the People are expressed in repugnant statutes that are null and
void. Marbury v. Madison, 5th US (2 Cranch) 137, 180:
It is the actions of our judicial servants that are without lawful support, and that which they claim
is legal, is unlawful and therefore not legal at all. The assumptions that anyone, but our servants
forming grand juries would lead to chaos and anarchy is both unfounded, self serving and
treasonous. The idea that the legislature has established the method and process for forming
grand juries and that the remedy of the People is the corrupt ballot box is also absurd and
fraudulent.
Lysander Spooner, author of Trial by Jury, 1852, clearly a favorite read by past and present
United States Supreme court Justices, in Chapter 5 said; The powers of juries are not granted to
them, by the people themselves, on the supposition that they know the law better than the
justices; but on the ground that the justices are untrustworthy, that they are exposed to bribes,
are themselves fond of power and authority, and are also the dependent and subservient
creatures of the legislature; and that to allow them to dictate the law, would not only expose the
rights of parties to be sold for money, but would be equivalent to surrendering all the property,
liberty, and rights of the people, unreservedly into the hands of arbitrary power, (the
legislature,) to be disposed of at its pleasure.
In Chapter 6 he said; The term jury is a technical one, derived from the common law; and when
the American constitutions provide for the trial by jury, they provide for the common law trial by
jury; and not merely for any trial by jury that the government itself may chance to invent, and
call by that name. It is the thing, and not merely the name, that is guaranteed. Any legislation,
therefore, that infringes any essential principle of the common law, in the selection of jurors, is
unconstitutional; and the juries selected in accordance with such legislation are, of course,
illegal, and their judgments void, therefore the juries of the present day illegal
The powers of juries, therefore, not only place a curb upon the powers of legislators and
judges, but imply also an imputation upon their integrity and trustworthiness; and these are the
reasons why legislators and judges have formerly entertained the intense hatred of juries, and,
so fast as they could do it without alarming the people for their liberties, have, by indirection,
PAGE 4 OF 9

denied, undermined, and practically destroyed their power. And it is only since all the real
power of juries has been destroyed, and they have become mere tools in the hands of legislators
and judges, that they have become favorites with them. A Common Law jury, therefore, insures
to us what no other court does --- that first and indispensable requisite in a judicial tribunal,
integrity.
And in Chapter 7 Lysander Spooner said; The principle of chapter 28 of Magna Carta, as
applicable to the governments of the United States of America, forbids that any officer appointed
either by the executive or legislative power, or dependent upon them for their salaries, or
responsible to them by impeachment, should preside over a jury in criminal trials. To have the
trial a legal (that is by common law) and true trial by jury, the presiding officers must be chosen
by the people, and be entirely free from all dependence upon, and all accountability to, the
executive and legislative branches of the government. Therefore the foreman of the jury is
properly the "Presiding Officer," so far as there is such an officer at all.
Our intention is to bring justice back into the Peoples out of control courts that is destructive to
the America envisioned by our founding fathers. Therefore the authority by which we act is in
fact our unalienable right, is in fact founded, in that We the People are the posterity of our
founding fathers, the inheritors of the documents that created the government that they serve in,
and we resent the attitude that the People are not capable of self-government.
Whereas we read, Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all
men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights,
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the
Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its
foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem
most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness therein it is the Peoples right, and it is our
duty to alter that which is destructive to our Safety and Happiness by returning to common law
juries and common law courts as it is written in the Constitution for the fifty united States of
America.
PAGE 5 OF 9

This is further realized in the preamble of our constitution that it is The People that ordained
and established the law where we read: We the people of the United States, in order to form
a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common
defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our
posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. And with
these absolutes we further submit the following authorities by which the judges in every state
shall be bound:
The authority of the People to form and administer to grand and petit juries is an unalienable
right protected and secured by the 5
th
6
th
and 7
th
Amendments. Whereas we read: Where rights
secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would
abrogate them. Miranda v. Arizona. The state cannot diminish rights of the people. Hurtado
v. The People of the State of California. "All laws, rules and practices which are repugnant to
the Constitution are null and void" Marbury v. Madison, 1803.
In most State Constitutions an impartial jury is guaranteed, obviously when the government
administers to the jury it can no longer be considered impartial, but tainted. How can it be when
the government seeking a conviction by government paid lawmakers, government paid judges,
government paid prosecutors, and government controlled juries that they call the jury impartial?
In the case UNITED STATES v. WILLIAMS, 1992; Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the
majority said:
"This Court's cases relying upon that power deal strictly with the courts' control
over their own procedures, whereas the grand jury is an institution separate from
the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, rooted in long
centuries of Anglo-American history, citing Hannah v. Larche. Justice Antonin
Scalia continued, courts neither preserve nor enhance the traditional functioning
of the grand jury that the "common law" of the Fifth Amendment demands. The
grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the
Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches
described in the first three Articles. It 'is a constitutional fixture in its own right,
citing United States v. Chanen, 1977 quoting Nixon v. Sirica, 1973. In fact the
PAGE 6 OF 9

whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional
government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and
the people, citing Stirone v. United States, 1960; Hale v. Henkel, 1906; G.
Edwards, The Grand Jury pgs 28-32 1906.
Justice Antonin Scalia continued:
Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and
under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has
traditionally been, so to speak, at arm's length. The grand jury's functional
independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to
investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is
exercised. "Unlike a court, whose jurisdiction is predicated upon a specific case
or controversy, the grand jury can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is
being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not, citing United
States v. R. Enterprises, 1991 quoting United States v. Morton Salt Co., 1950. The
Grand Jury need not identify the offender it suspects, or even the precise nature of
the offense it is investigating, citing Blair v. United States, 1919. The grand jury
requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation
nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment, see
Hale, supra. The grand jury in its day-to-day functioning generally operates
without the interference of a presiding judge, see Calandra, supra. The grand jury
swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy, see United States v.
Sells Engineering, Inc., We have insisted that the grand jury remain free to pursue
its investigations unhindered by external influence or supervision so long as it
does not trench upon the legitimate rights of any witness called before it, citing
United States v. Dionisio, 1973. Recognizing this tradition of independence, we
have said that the Fifth Amendment's constitutional guarantee presupposes an
investigative body 'acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge,
citing Stirone, supra. We have said that certain constitutional protections afforded
defendants in criminal proceedings have no application before the Grand Jury,
citing Ex parte United States, 1932; United States v. Thompson, 1920. We have
PAGE 7 OF 9

twice suggested, though not held, that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel does
not attach when an individual is summoned to appear before a grand jury, even if
he is the subject of the investigation. United States v. Mandujano, 1976; In re
Groban, 1957; Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 6(d).
In conclusion Justice Antonin Scalia said:
Given the grand jury's operational separateness from its constituting court, it
should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial
supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure.
Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the
grand jury's evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all, we declined to
enforce the hearsay rule in grand jury proceedings, since that "would run counter
to the whole history of the grand jury institution, in which laymen conduct their
inquiries unfettered by technical rules.
Hume calls the Trial by Jury "An institution admirable in itself, and the best calculated for the
preservation of liberty and the administration of justice that ever was devised by the wit of man."
Therefore We the People, affirm and proclaim the unalienable right to consent or deny the
actions of our elected servants through the Common Law Jury as our founding fathers provided
for in the 5
th
, 6
th
, and 7
th
Amendments. As Justice Antonin Scalia put it;
The Grand Jury is in effect a fourth branch of government "governed" and
administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its
authority emanates from the Bill of Rights it is a constitutional fixture in its own
right, in fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the
institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the
Government and the people.
We the People demand that tyrant servants step aside. We the People unified in all states and are
actively working to save the Republic by reinstating the Common Law Jury in every county.
The following is the Declaration made in all 3133 American Counties.
PAGE 8 OF 9

Declaration
We the people of [each American] County by the mercy and Grace of God having blessed us with the unalienable
right of the people as Grand Jurors, secured by the V Amendment of the Bill of Rights for the United States of
America, in order to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our
posterity by the securing of Natural Law do ordain and establish this Grand Jury principled upon Justice, Honor and
Grace for a perpetual administration of trust on behalf of the people.
On [date] the people of [each American] County of [each State] Constituted a Grand Jury by electing to reestablish
the Peoples Jury to be filed with the county clerk and the court clerk.
This declaration by the consent of the people shall be sufficient for the establishment of this Grand Jury presented
to the people and to be recorded with the County Clerk and the Supreme Court Clerk on this ________ day of
____________ in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and Fourteen and in the two hundred and thirty eight year of
our independence of the united States of America. In witness hereof by three:

S Witness #1 ____________________
E
A Witness #2 ____________________
L
Witness #3 ____________________

CONSTITUTION OF A COMMON LAW GRAND JURY - Inasmuch as for the sake of God, for the bettering of our
sovereignty, and for the more ready healing of the discord which has arisen between us and our civil servants,
wishing to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, and secure the blessings of liberty to enjoy forever in its
entirety. The people may select at their pleasure twenty five people from the sovereignty, who ought, with all their
strength, to observe, maintain; and cause to be observed, the peace and unalienable rights. If any of our civil servants
shall have transgressed against any of the people in any respect and they shall ask us to cause that error to be
amended without delay, or shall have broken some one of the articles of peace or security, and their transgression
shall have been shown to four Jurors of the aforesaid twenty five and if those four Jurors are unable to settle the
transgression they shall come to the twenty-five, showing to the Grand Jury the error which shall be enforced by the
law of the land. [MAGNA CARTA, JUNE 15, A.D. 1215, 61.]
DUTY OF THE GRAND JURY - If anyones unalienable rights have been violated, or removed, without a legal sentence
of their peers, from their lands, home, liberties or lawful right, we [the twenty-five] shall straightway restore them.
And if a dispute shall arise concerning this matter it shall be settled according to the judgment of the twenty-five
Grand Jurors, the sureties of the peace. [MAGNA CARTA, JUNE 15, A.D. 1215, 52.]
AUTHORITY OF A COMMON LAW GRAND JURY - No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous
crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to
be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,
nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public
use, without just compensation. [BILL OF RIGHTS AMENDMENT V]

PAGE 9 OF 9

This right of Declaration of self-rule was rejected by our arrogant judicial servants who think
they are the Masters. This is the Peoples peaceful Revolution to take back our Republic. America
stands at the precipice, and if our hired servants who have taken hold of our house of justice
continues to resist, thereby preventing the only institution capable of solving Americas
problems. The People will not give up their Liberty and are willing to give their lives for Justice
and their posterity. The People offered to the judiciary an olive branch, and to the alternative will
meet force with equal force.
President Kennedy said; A revolution is coming a revolution which will be peaceful if we are
wise enough; compassionate if we care enough; successful if we are fortunate enough but a
revolution which is coming whether we will it or not. We can affect its character; we cannot alter
its inevitability. This great fallen hero and martyr before giving his life went on to say; Those
who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. It is at this
precipice we stand today, it is for this purpose we are here today and we resolutely set our face,
and by the grace of our God we will peacefully succeed today:
It has taken the people fifty years to realize and react to President Kennedys warning of the
Revolution that unfolds before us as we stand at that precipice that will decide the fate of
America. These communications and True Bills is our peaceful and compassionate response in
an endeavor to positively affect its character.

Sincerely;
SEAL Signature
Grand Jury Administrator




PS: For more information go to www.NationalLibertyAlliance.org